Background: COVID-19 is a viral disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), first described in 2019, with a significant impact on everyday life since then. In December 2020, the first vaccine against COVID-19 from BioNTech/Pfizer was approved for the first time. However, little is known about the immune response to vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and immunomodulators or biologics. The aim of our study was to investigate antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IBD receiving immunomodulators or biologics compared to healthy controls. Methods: This was a single-center study with a retrospective observational design. Seventy-two patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease were included. Matching data from 72 healthy employees of our hospital were used as the control group. Data were matched by propensity score to patients with IBD. Blood samples were taken from both groups for antibody response, and both groups received an accompanying questionnaire. Results: Sixty-five (90.3%) patients of the IBD group reported taking immunomodulatory therapy. The mean antibody level for all IBD patients was 1,257.1 U/mL (standard deviation [SD] 1,109.626) in males and 1,500.1 U/mL (SD 1142.760) in female IBD patients after full vaccination. Compared to the healthy group, reduced antibody response could be detected (IBD group 1,383.76 U/mL SD 1,125.617; control group 1,885.65 U/mL SD 727.572, p < 0.05). In this group, blood samples were taken with an average of 61.9 days after the first vaccination. There was no vaccination failure in the IBD group after 2 vaccinations. After the first vaccination, side effects, including muscle pain, pain at the injection site, and fatigue, were reported more often in IBD patients than in the control group (total symptoms IBD group 58.3%, control group 34.5%, p < 0.007). The opposite occurred after the second vaccination when side effects were higher in the control group (total symptoms IBD group 55.4%, control group 76%, p = 0.077). There was a trend to a reduced immune response in elderly patients. Disease duration and concomitant immunomodulatory therapy (TNF-alpha blockers, interleukin inhibitors, integrin inhibitors, methotrexate, or azathioprine) had no impact on the immune response. However, longer time to last medication given and time passed to vaccination in patients with IBD seems to have a positive impact on antibody levels. Conclusion: Overall, we could show a high antibody response to vaccination with COVID-19 in all patients with IBD after 2 vaccinations. Vaccination was well tolerated, and no other adverse events were detected. Concomitant immunomodulatory therapy (TNF-alpha blockers, interleukin inhibitors, integrin inhibitors, methotrexate, or azathioprine) had no impact on seroconversion. Further evaluation of antibody titers over time is mandatory to detect early the need for re-vaccination in these patients.

Background: Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is often found in patients with gut dysbiosis such as irritable bowel syndrome. Recently, the association of SIBO and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been described in some cases. While clinical symptoms might be similar in IBD and SIBO, treatment is quite different for both diseases. Therefore, the differentiation between SIBO or a flare in IBD patients is key to optimizing treatment for these patients. Methods: We retrospectively investigated our patients with IBD receiving a glucose breath test for SIBO and correlated the results with the clinical symptoms (clinical remission or active disease). Results: 128 patients with the diagnosis “colitis” were analyzed in our cohort. Fifty-three (41.4%) patients had Crohn’s disease and 22 (17.2%) patients were suffering from ulcerative colitis. Seventy-four (57.8%) were female and 54 (42.2%) were male patients. A total of 18 (14.1%) patients had a positive testing for SIBO. Eleven (61.1%) cases were associated with CD patients and two (11.1%) with UC. IBD patients in clinical remission had a positive SIBO in six (19.4%) cases, while IBD patients with active disease were positive in nine (15.3%) cases. The proportion of positive SIBO in active IBD patients was higher; however, it did not reach significance. Older age was a risk factor for SIBO in patients with CD (p < 0.003). Conclusions: In our study, we could show that an increased amount of SIBO was found in IBD patients and was especially more frequent in patients with CD than in those with UC. In UC patients, SIBO rates were not different to patients with other gastrointestinal diseases investigated (e.g., infectious colitis, collagenous colitis, or irritable bowel syndrome). In active IBD, positive SIBO was detected more often numerically compared to quiescent disease; however, due to the low number of patients included, it was not significant. However, older age was a significant risk factor for SIBO in patients with CD. SIBO is of clinical relevance in the vulnerable patient cohort with IBD, and its real prevalence and impact needs to be investigated in further and larger clinical trials.

Background: Vedolizumab (VDZ) is a well-established and important therapeutic option in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the significance of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) with VDZ remains a contradictory field in daily clinical practice. Our study aims to clarify the predictive impact of VDZ drug levels in long-term clinical outcomes in a real-world cohort. Methods: Patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) from a tertiary IBD referral center at the University Hospital Augsburg, Germany, were enrolled in this single-center retrospective data analysis. Clinical and endoscopic data were collected at month 6, month 12, and at the last time of follow-up, and outcomes were correlated with VDZ levels at week 6. Results: This study included 95 patients, 68.4% (n = 65) with UC, 24.2% (n = 23) with CD, and 7.4% (n = 7) with indeterminate colitis (CI). Patients with a mean VDZ treatment time of 17.83 months ± 14.56 showed clinical response in 29.5% (n = 28) and clinical remission in 45.3% (n = 43) at the end of the study. Endoscopic response occurred in 20.0% (n = 19) and endoscopic remission in 29.5% (n = 28) at the end of the study. The sustained beneficial effect of VDZ was also reflected in a significant change in biomarker levels. VDZ trough level at week 6 was determined in 48.4% (n = 46) with a mean of 41.79 µg/mL ± 24.58. A significant association between VDZ level at week 6 and both short and long-term outcomes could not be demonstrated. However, numerically higher VDZ levels were seen in patients with endoscopic and clinical improvement at month 6 and at the time of last follow-up. Conclusions: This study demonstrated efficacy and safety for VDZ in a real-world cohort. Although, for some parameters, a clear trend for higher VDZ levels at week 6 was seen, the efficacy of VDZ was not significantly correlated to VDZ level at week 6, which questions the predictive value of VDZ levels in the real world.

Background/Objectives: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at an increased risk of various cancers; such as colorectal cancer; skin cancer; bile duct cancer; or lymphoma; with IBD itself not being the sole cause. Inappropriate or ineffective IBD therapy with a continuous inflammatory burden within the gut leads to an increased risk of malignancy. Our study aimed to investigate the risk of malignancy in our patient cohort; focusing on concomitant therapy; disease duration; and inflammatory burden. Methods: A total of 333 consecutive adult patients with IBD (Crohn’s disease; ulcerative colitis; and IBD unclassified) were included in this study. Data from patients were collected retrospectively using patient charts. The patients were treated in the gastroenterological outpatient clinic of the University Hospital of Augsburg; Germany; between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2018. Results: The study group included 333 patients; 32 (9.61%) of whom suffered from malignancy (any form). Men (n = 21; 65.62%) tended to develop malignancy more often than women (n = 11; 34.38%, p = 0.051). It was also observed that the probability of developing cancer was 2.40 times higher in male patients than in female patients in our cohort. However, this trend was non-significant (HR = 2.412; p = 0.075). Furthermore; the probability of developing cancer increased with the increasing age at the time of the first diagnosis of IBD (HR = 1.088; p < 0.025). A total of 20 patients (6.00%) received their cancer diagnosis after being diagnosed with IBD. The majority of those patients had skin (n = 6; 30.00%) or colon cancer (n = 5; 25.00%). Other diseases such as CML; NHL; HL; HCC; liver sarcoma; prostate cancer; breast cancer; seminoma; thyroid cancer (a second cancer in one of the patients); or CUP syndrome/lung cancer were diagnosed in single patients. Patients with IBD and colon cancer (n = 5; 25.00%) shared some of the known risk factors for tumour development; such as a long-lasting IBD (n = 5; 100.00%), diagnosis at a young age (under 30; n = 3; 60.00%), and the coexistence of PSC (n = 1; 20.00%). The cancer prevalence rate was relatively low in our cohort despite the use of diverse biologics and immunosuppressive drugs. Faecal calprotectin was confirmed as a relevant tool for inflammation monitoring in this cohort. Conclusions: In our study cohort; we could show a low prevalence rate of malignancy in IBD. There were more malignancies in men and in patients who were diagnosed with IBD at later ages. It can be observed that the prevalence rate of cancer was relatively low despite the use of diverse biologics and immunosuppressive drugs; which is the major conclusion of this study. Additionally; the known correlation between elevated levels of faecal calprotectin and gut inflammation was confirmed through our statistical analysis. The use of calprotectin as a non-invasive screening tool for gut inflammation is advised.

Mesalazine is the first-line treatment for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC) of any extent, as recommended by all major international and national guidelines. Approximately 85% of UC cases are classified as mild-to-moderate, making mesalazine a cornerstone therapy for the majority of patients. It rapidly induces clinical response and clinical remission, sustains steroid-free clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission over the long term, and has a safety profile comparable to placebo. This paper reviews the recommendations for mesalazine use in the German UC guideline and provides practical advice (including do’s and don’ts) for their implementation in daily clinical practice. Examples include explaining the expected timeline and nature of the clinical response to mesalazine treatment; outlining the practical implications of the dose-dependency of the drug’s therapeutic effect; and emphasizing the importance of rectal mesalazine as the first-line treatment for proctitis. Additionally, we conducted a systematic literature search to evaluate whether mesalazine should be continued after escalation to biologics or small molecules. While no clear evidence of short-term clinical benefit was found, there was also no evidence of harm. In light of the potential long-term chemoprotective effect of mesalazine, continuation may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Lastly, we provide an overview of the various mesalazine formulations available in Germany, detailing how they are not interchangeable due to differences in drug-release profiles, excipients, and dosing strengths. Understanding these differences may help clinicians personalize treatment, improving adherence and clinical outcomes.

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) frequently manifests at a young age, during the peak fertility years. Understanding the risks of negative pregnancy outcomes associated with IBD is crucial for effective pregnancy management and support. Additionally, it is essential to provide patients with the necessary knowledge to make informed choices and foster their confidence in navigating pregnancy while maintaining effective disease management. Although IBD frequently appears during the peak fertility years, knowledge about managing pregnancy in the context of IBD remains limited and often inaccurate among both physicians and patients. Our study aims to assess the complications occurring during pregnancy in patients with IBD, considering the level of disease activity, and to evaluate the standard of care provided to patients with chronic inflammatory conditions through a cohort analysis. Methods: Patients with IBD who had children were included in this single-center mixed-method (retrospective and prospective) study. Clinical data, disease progression, course of pregnancy, and complications were examined in women. Outcomes for children of men with IBD were also analyzed. To supplement the data, a survey addressing various pregnancy-related topics, including all patients from the university outpatient clinic for IBD, was conducted over a period of six months. Results: A total of 410 patients were screened retrospectively between 2010 and 2021. In total, 134 patients who had children were included in the study: 51.4% (n = 69) had Crohn’s disease, 44% (n = 59) had ulcerative colitis, and 4.6% (n = 6) had unclassified inflammatory bowel disease. Of the women, 85% (n = 34) were in remission for at least three months before pregnancy, 14.6% (n = 6) experienced an acute flare-up during pregnancy, and 10.3% (n = 4) and 7.7% (n = 3) had active disease at the time of delivery and during breastfeeding, respectively. Patients with IBD who were in remission before pregnancy did not experience a higher risk of pregnancy complications (no cases of pre-eclampsia or placental abruption were reported in this group). However, the rates of gestational diabetes and fever during pregnancy were 10% for those in remission, compared to 25% for those with active disease. Conclusions: Patients with IBD in remission did not present an increased risk of pregnancy complications. However, our survey indicates that those with active disease at conception were more likely to experience complications such as gestational diabetes and fever. These findings underscore the importance of adequate patient education regarding the safety of various IBD medications during pregnancy in order to avoid pregnancy-related complications.